Psychometric Testing On the Edge

Source : www.ukrecruiter.co.uk

Introduction

The word “psychometric” literally refers to psycho’ - ‘mental’ and ‘metric’ – ‘measurement’, so psychometric testing is ‘mental measurement’ (Edenborough, 2010). So it’s come through human psychology which is the study of human behaviour, feelings, thoughts and those would measure with the numbers (Edenborough, 2010). Today's most of the top organizations increasingly conduct psychometric tests to identify in candidates’ the specific characteristics, aptitudes, abilities that are possible to predict a person’s success in the certain job role and for succession planning. (Kindersley, 2009).

One of the definitions is “ a standard sample of behaviour which can be described by a numerical scale or category system” (Cronbach, 1984).

As a recruiter or a selector, organizations will select psychometric testing in one of three ways;

1. To observe how often a candidate indulges in specific kinds of behaviour.
2. To discover their strengths and powers of self-observation.
3. To see how they react and handle in certain set situations.

(Miller, 2016).

Also, these tests come with multiple-choice questions and they can be administered in both on-line and off-line. The psychometric tests aim to maximize the objective of standardizing the test conditions, instructions set, timeline, content, scoring, and interpretation (Miller, 2016).

The Psychometric tests can be divided into two broad categories: knowledge-based and person-based (Rust and Golombok, 1999).

 

Figure 1.0, Main Categories Of Psychometric Tests (Rust and Golombok, 1999).

 

Criteria for Effective Psychometric Testing

A systematic study can support to understand the researches that have been conducted to declare the assessment’s effectiveness (Kindersley, 2009). The statistical measurements outlining, reliability, predictability and other factors can support to make decisions on a test, which supports to discover the what needs to be measured in the particular job (Hindle, 2009).

The testing must be non- discriminative, which no group should be impacted due to age, gender, disability, religion or race. And also the final objective must not be affected by the assessor’s personal beliefs (Jay, 2015). The test must accurately predict the real values in real situations and  the real work environment (Kindersley, 2009). Furthermore, the test must be conducted under controlled circumstances and the score must be granted under the standard marking scheme (Hindle, 2009). Also, test results should be confidential and only legitimate people should have access to those (Kindersley, 2009).

There are well reputed psychometric test suppliers globally few of them are mentioned below.

•      British Psychological Society

•      Saville and Holdsworth (SHL)

•      The Test Agency—Hogrefe

•      The Psychological Corporation

(Miller, 2016)

 

Psychometric Models

The psychometric testing is subjected to “individual differences” a major subcategory of Psychology as a science (Edenborough, 2010). There are few models introduced in testing, which support to select the right employee (Edenborough, 2010).

 

Broad Brush Measures Model

The most common personality questionnaires have a relatively large number of scales (Edenborough, 2010). The Sixteen Personality Questionnaire (16PF) characterizes itself by its 16 scales and the Occupational Personality Questionnaire (OPQ) has 32 (Edenborough, 2010). In wave, there is a four-level structure, with no less than 108 features at the most minimal level (Ungemah, 2015). Each questionnaire has the scope of produced information on derivative scales. for example, the assorted team types, indicating the typical role matched in the team (Miller, 2016).

Altogether these personality questionnaires generate large chunks of information which can analyze in several ways(Rust et al, 1999). Sometimes, it is used to crop the general portrait of the candidate which is organized under different heading to reflect the scales are organized. For example, the OPQ 32 scales can be divided in to :

•      relationships with people

•      thinking style

•      feelings and emotions

(Edenborough, 2010).

Figure 2.0- Example of dimensions from personality profile (Ungemah, 2015)

 

The Big Five Model

Another method of touching the personality aspect of psychometric is the big five model. (Edenborough, 2010). The Big Five model is also called OCEAN or CANOE, both acronyms of the five traits (Ungemah, 2015).

1.    Neuroticism

2.    Openness to experience

3.    Extraversion

4.    Agreeableness

5.    Conscientiousness

 

Figure: 3.0 –  Image of Phrenological Organs (Ungemah, 2015)

Candidates are generally described as per their level of five personality factors (Rust et al, 1999). Each factor is very distinctive, and someone might high in Extraversion and low in Agreeableness (Rust et al, 1999). So, it is necessary to measure up on all five dimensions to have the complete picture of the individual to test in Big Five model (Rust et al, 1999).

 

Conclusion

Psychometric tests are very benefitted to uncover the hidden characteristics and personalities which can not be identified in the normal interview process. Also, these tests can save a lot of time and cost, by providing the actual picture of the candidates. Since the psychometric tests are standardized, equal opportunities and fair judgements can be produced. Further, these tests can be included in any stage of the recruitment and selection process.

As some drawbacks are since these tests are computerized people can practice similar mock exams or brain dumps and familiarize with the questions. Also sometimes these test can be incompatible with different countries and their cultures. And some people can be changed from time to time so the answers that are getting from these test can be varied by the time.

 

Still in Sri Lanka, psychometric testings are not very popular and most of the companies still go through the legacy interview process. The organizations like Sri Lankan Airlines, KPMG and some private banks are now using the psychometric testing in their recruitment process. So finally, selecting the right candidate with highly motivated, highly competent and best personalities will drive the organization to maximize the profits and it’s productivity.

 

Reference

Cronbach, L., 1984. Essentials Of Psychological Testing. 1st ed. New York, United States: Harper & Row Limited.

Edenborough, R., 2010. Brilliant Psychometric Tests. 1st ed. London, United Kingdom: Pearson Business.

Hindle, T., 1999. Interviewing Skills. 1st ed. London, United Kingdom: Dorling Kindersley Limited.

Jay, R., 2015. How To Succeed In Any Interview. 3rd ed. London, United Kingdom: Pearson Education.

Kindersley, D., 2009. DK Essential Managers: Interviewing People. 1st ed. London, United Kingdom: DK Publishing.

Miller, T., 2016. Successful Interviewing. 1st ed. New York, United States: Business Expert Press.

Rust, J. and Golombok, S., 1999. Modern Psychometrics. 2nd ed. New York, United States: Rotledge.

Ungemah, J., 2015. Misplaced Talent: A Guide to Better People Decisions. 1st ed. New Jersey, United States: Wiley.

McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y

Source: www.iwer.mit.edu

Origin Of Theory

Back in the 1950s, a social psychologist called Douglas McGregor who put forward his thoughts in the classical book called “the Human side of Enterprise” parallel to leading management theories like Ed Schein and Kurt Lewins (Birkinshaw and Mark, 2015). In that period companies treated their employees as cogs in the machinery, McGregor presented a different set of assumptions about a different perspective of human motivation (Jensen, 2014).

The essence of “bad old way of working” labelled as “scientific management” in the 1920s (Birkinshaw and Mark, 2015). These types of people are lazy, not interested to work, not willing to assume responsibilities, but want to have job security. And they are motivated for money, fringe perks and the threat of punishment (Birkinshaw and Mark, 2015). These set of employees correspond the Theory X. Theory Y shows an alternative of Theory X which is people willing to work extensively and to do a good job, to develop their career and to work in a stimulating environment is most important than monetary rewards (Birkinshaw and Mark, 2015).

 Dive into X and Y Theories

Theory X: Traditional way of control and direction

·         Inherited with avoiding work if it is possible (Adair, 2011).

·         People are to be coerced, controlled and feared  of punishment to achieve the organizational objects (Adair, 2011).

·         Most people prefer being directed, trying to avoid responsibilities, lacking of ambitions and wanting their job security (Bates and McGrath, 2013).

·         People are not innovative or not creative, and they just focus on assigned work (Adair, 2011).

·         Tight control by closed supervision, demands strict adherence to rules and threats of punishment (Adair, 2011).

·         Naturally demotivated and motivated by fear (Bates and McGrath, 2013).

·         Heavily rely on incentives, overtime allowances and work for money (Adair, 2011).

·         Resistance to organizational changes (Adair, 2011).

 

Theory Y : The wining way of personal and organizational goals

·         People are matured on the work pattern which is self-directed and self-controlled in their committed objectives (Adair, 2011).

·         Efforts in assigned work are natural as physically and mentally (Bates and McGrath, 2013).

·         People are always learning to develop their state while being innovative and creative when the opportunity is given in organizational problems (Adair, 2011).

·         Actively seeking more work and responsibilities.

·         Commitment to work is a part of their achievements (Bates and McGrath, 2013).

·         Naturally motivated and showing ambition towards the organizational needs (Bates and McGrath, 2013).

·         Adoptive to the organizational changes (Adair, 2011).

 

Summary of Theory X and Y

Table:1.0 - The many differences between Theory X and Theory Y are summarized 

(Hersey and Blanchard, 1977)

 

How to Use Theory X and Y

In an organization level, Theory X and Y stress a lot of decisions on a company to put forward on how the work gets done by their employees (Bates and McGrath, 2013). For example, if a company uses Theory X which strict on command and control style of working, then people are forced to work in a target driven narrowed scope and get paid on a specific job they have done (Bates and McGrath, 2013). Also, the Theory X organizations must focus on a structure where incentive systems in place (Birkinshaw and Mark, 2015). So if the staff is empowered, participate in decision making, be matured and self-motivated then the company can move towards Theory Y (Jensen, 2014). Where Theory Y promote cooperation, reward and healthy working relationships, there can be people who think this approach as a weakness and try to get the advantage of it (Bates and McGrath, 2013).

However, in modern work environments, there will be a blend of Theory X and Y both (Birkinshaw and Mark, 2015). Because the company’s recruitment and selection process must be very stronger to identify Theory X and Y people specifically (Jensen, 2014).  That’s why modern techniques like psychometric testing and lengthy interview processes introduced (Palmer, 2007). So sometimes it is hard for modern managers to embrace Theory Y and reject the Theory X in their teams (Bates and McGrath, 2013). The approach should be between two extremes of X and Y (Bates and McGrath, 2013). So, teammates who are in between are motivated by opportunities to work with the rest of teammates and gain respect around them (Bates and McGrath, 2013).  So clear out the confusions between Theory X and Y people management, it is import to set the clear limits on procedures, deadlines and set the expectation of total compliance (Adair, 2011). Also, making clear when the failures will enforce the rules and punishments (Adair, 2011).

Finally, the McGregor theory helps to understand people and how to manage them (Birkinshaw and Mark, 2015). It also supports to design more productive jobs and develops compensation and incentive systems to get the best from the employees (Birkinshaw and Mark, 2015).

 

Conclusion

In the Sri Lankan context, the Theory X and Y people exist in both government and private sectors. As an example, most of the government servants are placed into Theory X where they are working on directions, their scope is narrowed and motivated only on their salary. The manufacture factories, garments factories, call centers, and fast-food restaurants are operated on Theory X model where the professional service companies, R&D institutes and startup companies are functioned on Theory Y.

According to the unpublished surveys and internal sources, the software and technology development companies like Pearson operates on Theory Y model where the business need self-motivated people who think out of the box and more innovative. The company always focus to maintain healthy levels on hygiene factors like company policies, supervision, interpersonal relations, salary, status, job security personal life and working conditions. And the Theory Y model nurtures that culture. Also, the company encourage the people to have more contact and relationship with each other to achieve associated social, esteem and self-actualization goals by making open office environment which does not have any cubicles, even not for general manager. That also supports the positive aspect of Theory Y. So Theory Y highly benefitted Pearson to execute its business model with more profits and productivity.

 

Reference

Adair, J., 2011. John adair's 100 greatest ideas for effective leadership. 1st ed. Minnesota, United States: Capstone.

Bates, B. and McGrath, J., 2013. The little book of big management theories. 1st ed. London, United Kingdom: Pearson.

Birkinshaw, J. and Mark, K., 2015. Key MBA models. 1st ed. New Jersey, United States: FT Publishing International.

Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K., 1977. Management of organizational behavior. 1st ed. New Jersey, United States: Prentice-Hall.

Jensen, R., 2014. Improving software development productivity: effective leadership and quantitative methods in software management. 1st ed. New Jersey, United States: Prentice-Hall.

McGregor, D., 1960. The human side of enterprise. 1st ed. New York, United States: McGraw-Hill.

Palmer, S., 2007. People and self management. 1st ed. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

The Nine Belbin’s Team Roles

Source: www.belbin.com

Introduction

A researcher from Cambridge, Dr Meredith Belbin, discovered the nine clusters of behaviour - these were called ' Belbin Team Roles'. He concluded that the team’s composition with similar kind of people will not last longer as together and no innovations will be created (Palmer, 2007).

For successful teams, Belbin (1993) argues that the following roles must be played by members of the team.

Table : 1.0 Belbin's Nine Team Roles

 (Belbin,1993) 

When working and observing groups, the team roles plays a vital part in how the team members coercively work together (Bates and McGrath, 2013).

 How to apply the Belbin’s Theory

To apply the Belbin’s theory it is compulsory to identify the strength and weaknesses of each individual in the team (Jones, Jowitt and Holton, 2016). Also, it needs to identify the team’s goals and objectives, the resource capacity and deadlines of your projects (Jones, Jowitt and Holton, 2016).

When recruiting, the combination of interviews and Belbin’s questionnaire can be used to identify each person’s role /s (Mowll and O'Neil, 2010). Also, assure that the team able to cover all the role functions and sometimes a single person can cover multiple roles (Hoover and Gorrell, 2009). Once the expectations are set, observe the progress, identify the failures and mitigate them (Hoover and Gorrell, 2009).

As mentioned by Bates and McGrath (2013), some example of problems it may rise and how roles impact them to resolve;

·         When an uncertainty of the team's objectives, how Shaper is acting.

·         When the low performance of the team, how better the Completer handling

·         When the team is not capable to resolve problems, how Plant is supporting

·         When the team is poor in analyzing a situation, how the Monitor get triggers

·         When the team can’t convert new ideas to the action, what Implementer is doing

·         When the team is lack of resources, how Resource Investigator tackle the resource balancing

·       When the team is lack of harmony and commitment, how team worker building the team spirit.

·      When the team is not collaborative, how Coordinator involves connecting moving parts.

·   When the team needs subject matter expert knowledge, how your Specialist contributes his knowledge to the project.

 

Figure:2.0 Belbin’s Role groups, (Jones and Jowitt, 2016)

Each of the Belbin’s roles has unique strengths and using them can compensate for any missing roles which would be a great challenge (Bourne and Bourne, 2009). Also discussing the strength of the team among the team would be the right way to complete the profiles. And it supports to identify and mitigate the potentially problematic areas which could arise inside the team (Mowll and O'Neil, 2010).

As discussed by Jones and Jowitt (2016) for example;

·         If the team consists of many Sharpers then they bring energy to the team, but they can create conflicts while they are competing.

·         If Completers finishers are lacking whilst the task is completed by the team, the quality of the end product will be poor.

·         If the Monitor evaluators are too many even, they support to new ideas and questions, it can lead to analysis paralysis.

When you select a leader to the team, his strength should be on people and the attributes of the Coordinator role more suitable for that (Palmer, 2007). So, Coordinators can be leaders on someday (Palmer, 2007).

 

Conclusion

By using Belbin’s theory, individuals can have self-assessment of their strengths, which will nourish the effective communications and precise understanding between teammates and the supervisors. To become a high performing team, the team should have access to nine roles of Belbin’s, and it doesn’t mean that every team must contain 9 individuals minimum, however, most of the team can have people who play two or three roles that are comfortable to them.

As Yemm (2013) discussed in his case study when a new project kick-off and a new team formed. The initial startup would be the focus of the team roles and teamwork rather than the project details. Once members are comfortable with their preferred roles, it is a lot easier to assign responsibilities and actions which fitted best for them. So, team members can get their work done a lot faster because they are happier with their roles and willing to go an extra mile because of that. That saves a lot of project hours and no debates or arguments raised because the team is focusing on their outputs and achievements. It transitions the team from forming towards storming in lot easier.

In modern work environments, managers are applying Belbin’s theory when forming new teams. Also, when recruiting it takes Belbin’s questionnaire to understand the right team member to the right role to combine with psychometric testing.

 

Reference

Bates, B. and McGrath, J., 2013. The Little Book of Big Management Theories. 1st ed. London, United Kingdom: Pearson.

Belbin, M., 1993. Team Roles at Work. 1st ed. Boston, United States: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Bourne, M. and Bourne, P., 2009. DK Essential Managers: Motivating People. 1st ed. London, United Kingdom: DK Publishing.

Hoover, J. and Gorrell, P., 2009. The Coaching Connection: A Manager’s Guide to Developing Individual Potential in the Context of the Organization. 1st ed. New York, United States: AMACOM.

Jones, P., Jowitt, A. and Holton, V., 2016. How to Coach Your Team. 1st ed. New Jersey, United States: FT Publishing International.

Mowll, J. and O'Neill, C., 2010. Fast Track to Success: Managing. 1st ed. London, United Kingdom: Pearson Business.

Palmer, S., 2007. People and Self Management. 1st ed. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

Yemm, R., 2013. FT Essential Guide to Leading Your Team. 1st ed. New Jersey, United States: FT Publishing International.

Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory

Source : https://wikispaces.psu.edu

Introduction

The two-factor theory of motivation also called as the dual-factor theory or motivation-hygiene theory was developed by Frederick Herzberg (Bates and McGrath,2013). He has conducted his research in a thirty-mile radius of Pittsburg, United States of America, where the centre of heavy industries was located at that time (Boerner, 2015). There were over 200 accountants and engineers who participated in this research and they were full-time employees and 100% utilized in plant and the facilities (Schermerhorn, 2009). The research included interviews where he asked what aspects “turn them on” about their job (Schermerhorn, 2009). Herzberg (1959) defined those satisfaction factors as “motivators” and dissatisfaction factors as “hygiene factors”, as illustrated in figure1.0.

 

Figure: 1.0 Contrasting view of Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction. (Judge and Robbins, 2017)

 

Adair (2011) has explained Hygiene factors and motivators as follows;

Hygiene Factors

1. Company policy and administration: accessible to clearly define policies and procedures especially relating to people, appropriateness of the management and organization.

2.    Supervision: technically directed; reachable, competence and fairmindedness of the supervisor.

3.    Interpersonal relations: relationship with supervisors, subordinates and colleagues; quality of social life internally in the work environment.

4.    Salary: total remuneration package, such as wages, salary, pension, company car and other fringe benefits.

5.    Status: position or rank compared to others, symbolized by title, size of office or other tangible elements.

6.    Job security: freedom and secured atmosphere in the job no fear of losing position or losing employment altogether.

7.    Working conditions: the physical conditions in the workplace; the amount of work; facilities available; and environmental aspects, e.g. light, space, tools, ventilation, noise, health and safety measures.

Motivators 

1.    Achievement: specific successes, such as the completion of a job, solutions to problems, evidence and seeing the results of their work.

2.    Recognition: any act of recognition from the management, whether notice or praise, separating recognition and reward from recognition with no reward.

3.    Possibility of growth: changes in the job where the potential for professional growth is increased. Being the successor for the next level.

4.    Advancement: changes that enhance position or status at work. Playing the next level role.

5.    Responsibility: being given real responsibility, matched with the necessary authority to discharge it.

6.    The work itself: the actual job or segments of it, the work pattern and engagement.

The hygiene factors are those where employees seek to avoid particular circumstances, whereas the motivating factors are matched with people's needs to gain self-actualization or self-realization (Boerner, 2015). The factors that determine whether there is dissatisfaction or no dissatisfaction does not belong to the work itself, but rather, they are external factors (Bate et al 2013). Herzberg (1959) emphasized the hygiene factors as "KITA" factors, which KITA is an abbreviation for Kick In The Ass. The negative physical KITAs include critical feedback or right royal rollicking, where negative psychological KITAs include emotional playing and manipulation (Bates and McGrath, 2013). The positive KITAs include incentives, pay raise, bonuses other monetary benefits (Bates and McGrath, 2013). However positive KITAs are not contributed to the motivation, but if they drop from the expected level it will cause demotivation and resentment (Bates and McGrath, 2013).

 

How to apply in the workplace

Offering the Herzberg's motivators and avoiding the problems with the hygiene factors let managers to enhance the overall performance and provide individuals with greater job satisfaction (McGrath, 2015). 

• First, identify what motivates the employees and prioritize them. The motivational factors differ from person to person and their expected weightage (Bates and McGrath, 2013).
• Always review the individual work they do and redistribute the mundane work among the team. After review, avoid any boring and non-value addition work assigned to the same worker (McGrath, 2015).
• The necessary resources, training and right tools are needed to be provided to them to work effectively and efficiently with a pleasant environment to work (McGrath, 2015).
• Always create opportunities for advancement and personal development to internal promotions. Set the realistic and challenging targets and when they achieved recognize them publicly, those can do wonders in morale and productivity (Arneson, 2010).
• Maintain good communication with the staff. Always have the visibility of what’s going inside the team and what issues they are facing (McGrath, 2015).
• The job itself should have a sufficient level of challenge to utilize the full capacity of the employee. Employees who demonstrate higher capacities should increase the level of responsibility and work. If the job has not utilized the full capability of the employee, then it should be assigned to a low skilled employer or the task should be automated. If an employee is fully utilized and fully engaged it would be another motivational factor (Schermerhorn, 2009).

As per the Boerner (2015)  discussed the human needs and their desires have not changed much in the last five decades. So considering above mentioned arguments, it can make more direct implications when it comes to the designing job roles and shaping the workplaces (Arneson, 2010).

With regards to the local industry, many BPO companies always try to minimize employee turnover and boost productivity, but it is an essential factor to motivate the employees and keep them happy.

As per the internal surveys and published job advertisements, following are a few examples of local companies that try to facilitate benefits for their employees to maintain their motivation level high.

• Modern buildings with high health and safety measures with free parking.
• Coffee machines, pool tables, gaming consoles and after-work parties to socialize with coworkers.
• The company shared and hosted daycare centres for the kids of their employees.
• Platinum or gold category of Medical and Insurance schemes.
• Maintain the work-life balance with flexible hours and work from home facilitates.
• Above industry standard salaries, 6-12-month bonuses.
• Annual subscriptions for professional accreditations
• Overseas travelling for training, business class travels and luxurious accommodations.
• Company provide high-grade vehicles or vehicle loans, unlimited fuel allowances.
• Club memberships and entertainment allowances.
• All hands and townhall meetings with executive leadership to discuss the issues.
• Best employee of the month/quarter program and rewards.
• Company-wide appreciations from CEO for employees who performed outstandingly.
• Successor planning/grooming programs.

 Conclusion

Herzberg theory of motivation has been very applicable to modern management styles, where it gives a better understanding of motivating people at the same time how they retain with keeping the anticipated levels of hygiene factors. And these factors will directly impacting to the company productivity, revenue as well as the company image where people lable as a “best place to work”.

Reference

Adair, J., 2011. John Adair's 100 Greatest Ideas for Effective Leadership. 1st ed. Minnesota, United States: Capstone.

Arneson, S., 2010. Bootstrap Leadership. 1st ed. California,United States: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Bates, B. and McGrath, J., 2013. The Little Book of Big Management Theories. 1st ed. London, United Kingdom: Pearson.

Boerner, L., 2015. Similarities, Differences and Implications for Modern Management. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory, 1, 2,3,5.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B. and Snyderman, B., 1959. The Motivation To Work. 1st ed. New York, United States: Wiley.

Judge, T. and Robbins, S., 2017. Essentials of Organizational Behavior, 14/e. 1st ed. London, United Kingdom: Pearson.

McGrath, J., 2015. The Little Book of Big Decision Models. 1st ed. London, United Kingdom: Pearson.

Schermerhorn Jr, J., 2009. Management. 10th ed. New Jersey, United States: Wiley.